■8 7 



7 



HAWAII. 



SPEECH 



OF 



HON. R. F. 0ROUSSARD, 



OF LOUISIANA, 



HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 



JUNE 13t, 1898 



WASHINGTON, 
I898. 



^ 



V 



72943 









x^\ 



SPEECH 

OF 

HON. R. F. BROUSSAIID 



The House having under consideration the joint resolution (II. Res.*239) to 
provide for annexing the Hawaiian Islands to the United States- 
Mr. BROUSS ARD said : 

Mr. Speaker: In the discussion of the project advanced by the 
pending resolution it is evident that we are not occupied with the 
benefits that are to accrue to the people of Hawaii, but our con- 
cern is how our people are to be affected. I take this to be the 
sole question at issue with us. I shall make no attempt to con- 
vince those who in this or any other matter of public import assume 
the position that the policy of our Government should seek to 
benefit any people save our own. Those who argue that we should 
annex Hawaii because it will result beneficially to the people of 
the islands will not be heard patiently by me, nor shall I stoop to 
argue the matter with them. The advantage or disadvantage to 
them is a question of supreme indifference to me. Let theni look 
to their own interests. 

The greatest good to the greatest number of the American 
people should be the inexorable rule of every American, in or out 
of Congress, in the solution of all public problems. 

I therefore lay down the proposition as self-evident that it is not 
only our right but our highest duty to consider no other but our 
own interests in discussing this project. 

Accepting this as the true criterion by which we are to be guided 
in considering this resolution, it necessarily follows that with those 
who advocate annexation rests the burden of proving that we shall 
be benefited by annexation. 

But before entering into a discussion of the advantages or dis- 
advantages to accrue to us through annexation, I desire to empha- 
size the fact that, in my opinion, the House is without power to 
pass upon this question in the shape presented. 

Generally speaking, a nation may acquire territory by con- 
quest, by purchase, or by discovery. The framers of our Consti- 
tution laid down the rule of action, however, that we may, apart 
from the modus operandi just mentioned, acquire territory by 
treaty. Under this provision Jefferson negotiated the purcnase 
of Louisiana and the Northwest from France in 1803. Under 
President Monroe, in 1819, in the same way we acquired Florida 
from Spain, and during the Presidency of Mr. Johnson, in 1870, 
Alaska was ceded to us by Russia. Upper California, including 
what is now California, Nevada, Utah, Wyoming, New Mexico, 
and Arizona, we acquired in 1848, under Mr. Polk's Administra- 
tion, as a result of our war with Mexico. Our title to this latter 
territory is by force of conquest. 

We purchased Alaska from Russia in 1867. The title was con- 
veyed by treaty. The only other territory acquired by us was 
Texas, in 184-5, under President Tyler's Administration. Texas, an 
independent republic, was admitted into the Union a3 a new 
State. It was never annexed in the true sense of the word, nor 
can it be quoted as a precedent for this "scheme," for it is not 
here sought to admit Hawaii into the Union as a new State. No- 
where in the Constitution do I find authority vested in this House 
3452 3 



to acquire territory, except to admit new States into the Union, 
and then this authority is exercised conjunctively with the 
Senate. 

The Senate alone is vested with power to ratify or reject trea- 
ties having for their purpose acquisition of territory. The terri- 
tory of Upper California, then, was obtained by conquest; Loui- 
siana, Florida, and Alaska were acquired under the treaty-making 
power, and Texas was admitted into the Union under the express 
power given Congress to admit new States. But I shall not fur- 
ther deal with this phase of the question. Abler men have long 
since settled it in the debate that led to the admission of Texas 
into the Union. 

But lest, in their greed to acquire foreign territory, the advo- 
cates of annexation should, by brute force, brush aside this con- 
stitutional plea, as they evidently propose to do, I shall return to 
a discussion of the merits of the controversy. 

I can conceive of but three ways that we can be benefited by the 
acquisition of any territory — that is, from a commercial standpoint, 
or from a military standpoint, or from a political standpoint. 

Now, in annexing Hawaii, shall we be benefited in a commer- 
cial way? Let us see. 

Since 1875 our Government has been in commercial treaty with 
Hawaii. Our trade relations with her under the treaty make 
absolutely certain the benefits or disadvantages which must fol- 
low annexation. Under the treaty the products of the islands are 
placed on our markets free of duty, while in return the duties of 
many of the manufactured articles of the United States are re- 
mitted us. Our present trade relations w\th Hawaii, therefore, 
are exactly what they will be after annexation, if we commit the 
blunder of annexing. Now, have we lost or gained by this ex- 
change of commodities under the treaty? 

I here attach a comparative statement of our export and import 
trade with Hawaii: 

TRADE OF THE UNITED STATES WITH HAWAIIAN ISLANDS. 
Total exports and imports of merchandise. 



Year ending 
June 30— 



Exports. 



Domes- 
tic. 



For- 
eign. 



Total. 



Imports. 



Free. 



Duti- 
able. 



Total. 



Excess 
of im- 
ports. 



1875 

1876 

1877 

1878 

1879 

1880 

1881 

1882 , 

1883 , 

1884 

1885 , 

1886 

1887 

1888 

1889 

1890 

1891 

1892 

1893 

1894 

1895 

1896. 

1897 

3452~ 



$621, 

724, 
1,109, 
1,683, 
2,288, 
1,985, 
2,694, 
3,272, 
3,683, 
" 446, 
2, 709, 
3,115. 
3,520 

3,025: 

3,336; 

4,608! 
935! 
3;662: 
2: 717, 
3; 217 
3,618 
3,928: 
4,622 



$40, 
54, 
163, 

52, 
86, 
100, 
83, 
78, 
92, 
77, 
78, 
76, 
101, 
59, 
39, 
104, 
171, 
119, 
110, 
88, 
74, 
57, 
67, 



779, 
1,272, 
1,736, 
2,374, 

086, 
2,778, 
3,350, 
3,776, 
3.523, 
2, 787, 
3, 192, 
3,622, 
3,085, 
3,375, 
4,711, 
5,107, 
3, 781, 
2,827, 
3,306, 
3,723, 



$168, 771 
192,071 



2,641,628 
3,243,988 
4.565,918 
5; 517, 737 
7,621,690 
8,195,937 
7,900,000 
8,817,067 
9,741,924 
0291 9,892,889 
20311,050,038 



187 
057 

5203,985,707 
494 4,690,075 



12,832,910 
12,309,758 
13,865,648 

8,062,076 

9,087,856 

9,969,' 

7,870,304 
11,743,343 
13,663,012 



058,420 
184,610 
164,969 
37,202 
13,950 
40,526 
15,263 
24,604 
42,524 
25,965 
40,430 
63,783 
29, 186 
10,341 
14,830 
4,150 
29,949 
13,806 
58,911 
95,336 
18,657 
14,361 
24,787 



227, 191 
376,681 
550,335 
678,830 
257,938 
606,444 
533,000 
646,294 
238,461 
925,965 
857,497 
805,707 
922,075 
060,379 
817,740 
313,908 
895,597 
075,882 
146,767 
065,317 
888,961 
757,704 
687, ] 



$565,027 
597,424 
1,277,386 
942,731 
883,020 
2,520,274 
2,754,928 
4,295,519 
4,462,396 
4,402,612 
6,069,575 
6,613,009 
6,300,046 
7,975,176 
9,472,079 
7,602,491 
8,788,385 
4,294,254 
6,319,104 
6,759,130 
4,165,904 
7,771,997 
8,997,724 



A mere glance at these figures shows that for every dollar's 
worth of merchandise that we have been permitted to place upon 
the Hawaiian market without paying duty to the Hawaiian Gov- 
ernment the people of the islands have been allowed to use our 
markets free of duty for from two to three dollars' worth of their 
goods. 

In other words, for every dollar's worth of advantage we have 
secured from them under the treaty we have paid them from two 
to three dollars; and in doing this we have placed American toil- 
ers, in field and factory, in direct competition with the cheap con- 
tract labor of Hawaii. 

Strange to say, this " scheme" finds its greatest supporters on 
the other side of this Chamber, where men most prate of the pro- 
tection of American labor. It appears, too, from these statistics 
that a large percentage of the goods exported by us to Hawaii 
is of foreign manufacture, so that American laborers are greater 
sufferers from the treaty than at first is apparent. 

To adopt this resolution would be to perpetuate these condi- 
tions and to continue the competition between American and 
Asiatic labor, not in the markets of the world, but to invite the 
competition at home on an equal footing with us. 

Mr. Speaker, I have the honor to represent the greatest sugar- 
producing district in the United States. Rice within the last 
few years has become a staple product in my district. 

These two articles are practically the only products raised for 
exportation in the Sandwich Islands. Both commodities are ad- 
mitted into this country under the present treaty free of duty. 

Annexation would forever keep our markets free for the admis- 
sion of both of these articles. Representing, as I do, a district 
whose main dependence is in these two products, I take it that I 
have the right to voice the opinion and to advocate the rights of 
my people in opposition to this "scheme." 

Laborers, mechanics, and chemists in the sugar fields and refin- 
eries of Louisiana receive good wages to-day. On the rice farms 
and in the rice mills of southwest Louisiana men find employment 
readily and at remunerative figures. There no strikes are heard, 
menacing the security of the community. No injunctions are re- 
sorted to to coerce one man to starve that his more fortunate 
neighbor might enrich himself. There the shrill and discordant 
voice of anarchy is never heard. There there is contentment and 
happiness and plenty. Men enjoy more independence and liberty 
there than anywhere on earth. Your proposition is to strike a 
deathly blow at all these blessings. 

In the great West men are learning to appreciate the possibil- 
ities of sugar-beet culture. Up to recently it seemed to be the one 
ambition of the Secretary of Agriculture to advance and foster 
the sugar-beet industry in the section of the country from which 
he hails. We in Louisiana felt that the beet sugar would at no 
distant time supplant cane sugar, because it can be produced 
cheaper, but we welcomed our neighbors in this field of operation. 
Their competition was to be American competition amongst Amer- 
ican citizens, white man competing against white man. We were 
glad to meet them, and we would have rejoiced at their success; 
but what do you propose to do with this budding hope of the West? 
Suffocate it, stifle it, strangle it, together with its older brother of 
the South; and for what and for whom? For a trade in which 
the American people lose three times as much as they gain. For 
a race of negroes, of Chinese, half-breeds, and lepers. 
3452 



What have these done that they should be paid to receive better 
treatment at our father's house than we, the children, should have? 

Pause and consider before you take such a course. The step into 
the abyss is easily taken ; once taken it can never be retraced. For 
all time to come, should you annex Hawaii, must my people sur- 
render to these people their heritage and the West her hopes of 
adding to her already great achievements in agriculture? And 
the surrender will be all the more mortifying when in return we 
shall receive a "mess of pottage." 

But, says the Secretary of Agriculture and the advocates of an- 
nexation here, you overestimate the possibilities of sugar and rice 
in the Hawaiian Islands. Let us see if this is so. 

In Hawaii, the Philippines, and the West Indies sugar cane is 
indigenous to the soil. Here it is not. Sugar can there be raised, 
according to governmental statistics, at a cost of li cents per 
pound. Here it costs nearly 4 cents. To the sugar trust, which 
controls the entire imported output, transportation is cheap. 

How long then, I ask, can our people maintain this unequal and 
unjust competition? You great protectors of American labor and 
American industries, answer me this, if you dare. 

The following is an official statement: 
3453 



V 


ft 


<y 


>d 


■a 

s 


I 

X 


a 


A 




o 






s 


S 


3 





8 




O 


bfl 


s 


P 
QQ 


e 





Is* 

X O 



i^&^feSggi 



S8 



-S „ . 

o x x to x c> i— 1 1.-: o co rfnOHdi 

r-'rHCM'co'wcM'o^iCiOO-^iS 



..a-COiG*".. 



1SS 

ir$CM 



•S ° b § « 

^dxfi* 



. cm cs os m oo © o to oo e i gj ■ a so : ( ■* co co o is co co 
&J co t-i -v; 5$ 35 ■* 5£ »ne» «-5 «o eo «5 ■* t- 3 co fc- rn os t-i 

OHtl»H005MHC!HNNCOH^-*K>COMH 

Qcxfcvfci'T»rT(roft^i>roo"e»cro4xrrHeoi'Coc»L^i^so 



030mi-H'*M»lT*!Or'.MQO»lMt-Ni>lOO** 

oj i- o? ~. x t; x co - -t ■ - ; , - -r — c > to — c- > — t ,-, os co 

~ O J - — 1 CO CM T-i -# O OS CO iO to 1 - ■* W ■-* KS t- OS CO to 

QHJJ»rtO)3smHrtHNHOOH-*^MMrfiH 

Qrfc«c>f^^o^L^coc»G>"o<>frHc«i>roo"c»t^*i-reo 



r-iccc»-*i- : xo-co>ai.ococoHOioos'*co»o 

.; X 'M » W O lO i.- X CO i- CC H » H H C M X N ffl H 

.gcnonNxfflst-Hwiosoo^osioaNH 
is ei co co so csN-n of co' w"{o"dg" -^Tt- 1.0 cxf t^"so aTioW 

g©COSOlSCSr-<i--lr-ISOi.-CMlSCO'*ICMSO>Ot-CMi-ICM 

^QOi"l^"l4'^«^Tl^^J^as^4'co*coc1?^^^weo^^©^'r-^ 



o o o 

3§ 









1J; 

5cos 



^ \0*4*T-*r- i 



lOPOCCOX 
CS © t— CD I— CS 

10 25 1- co 00 o 



. -# >S CO CM OS 

ICOOCfttOlO 



rrt . 



5888! 

Cc'cTotOi 

l-HCOCO©C 



• b- iff CM 1-1 O CS OS 



lOOIflH^MOO 
)t-COCOt^-r-|-<$i-*ii-«* 



C) i-Ti-Tof eo w cm 9* N cm r-i" 



Sc2 



t- lO CO CO CM 1— It- CS t- OS OS ■* 10 e 



isssmsss&ss^s 



cS^ 1 



lis 

©+s • 

>• °IS 



S.S81 



i*£^ 



;8ct3i 



<t-C5COCOt-iO-*»<©00xri00fc- 

SOSCSl— -HiOOOCSt-COi— I-** CO 00 
• OXt-^iON^nOHCOHSI 



1 to to OS CS CS CO CO : 
I CO CS CO i- 1— I CS o - 

t to 10 o co t- m to » 
roto"to*'cot-rcs'~»c; 

> 1— 1 i-H 00 CM OS ■>* so s 
I SO -* •* CM t- CM CO t 



> CS IC i-H CO t- 

'COCiJr-HCOO 

> CO uO CM CO T-i 



Sc25§ 

CMCMCMi-H 



)Ot-00 

>t»XiO 



„-T*ptccr. 'Oto to 

tScOOi-lCOOCOt- 

S 0*t- "* CO"CO"CM C5~ 
<^ 00 CO t- CS t~ >-0 t- 

OCs3<r-<t-C005rH 

^ co*'csr'X't-riff''co''>o' 



1 uj 5- to co 
;co 
J? eo""*""*e» «s"iQfc ^csb--*sotocscomt- 

Q«rlHHf5«MM tH 



_ CMl-CO-«t<C5rHi-i 
-f CT CO '0 i.O OS to l.O CC' i-t i-H ■* ^H IS i-H tO 
-*CSCOOC-i'*OSOl-L--*i-iCOiC05»0 



^CiOHO5C5Pl-C0«iHCCHTtlCrin 



L- to 1-1 O ■* CO t- iC to 



O OS i.O to 
!-l-CO tO 
CO 00 L- CO 

L~?r-lnzB' 



t- 00 os o ^h ^ co -* > n to 1 - 00 cs © -j ? j co -f o to i - 
t-t-t^oocococosococ/jaoeocooscscsoscscscsos 

XXXXXXXXXXXMXXXXXXXXX' 



^ S 2 



2oo-^ 




-flcs 








*£* 




r=3 2 „ 




^ fl 




© O r- 




f-l^H 




P, ^ 




« © ^ 




X fc£ M 




«w ^ S 




Ot>° 


© 


^^CM 


2 


©r-H* 1 

§2^ 




■is? , 
0S >r ,CO 


a 


§ 


CgrH 


^ 


»>o^ 


m 


^ a ~ 




c3^^ 


1 

E3 




*t»-s 


O 


XCJH 


9 




1 


rj © O 


T3 

5 


fH-S . 


^ 


^ 4J '0 





© tJD© 


M< 


fe .a^ 


y 


Ofld 


a 


"c!* 3 ° 


^ 


£** 


1 





ooS'gg 

w g ® c3 , 

3 2 Sd'-' 



2 60 ,.S ft 


fog® ©^J 

8*1 S« 


«2p21a>» 


+a c3 2+3*2 


stoms 
iian s 
has, 
opic t 
lated 




s © © a © 


5^s©^ 




Sos^S 


-j ©^ c^> 


s - p.a>!o 


.2 © © 



3iC2 



8 

Our loss in governmental revenues from this treaty from sugar 
alone is nearly $60,000,000, while from rice importations five mil- 
lions more were lost to us. Annexation will perpetuate this con- 
dition of affairs, and with the continued increase of the produc- 
tion of sugar on the four islands comprising the coveted territory 
we must expect to surrender to these people every year from five 
to eight million dollars of our revenues, for what? For the pleas- 
ure of paying the national debt of the people of the islands, of 
protecting them from foreign invasion, building up their com- 
merce, and fortifying their coast. 

Strange as it may seem, the strongest supporters of this "scheme " 
are the men who wrote in their party platform in 1896 these words: 

Resolved, We condemn the present (Democratic) Administration for not 
keeping faith with the sugar producers of this country. The Republican 
party favors such protection as will lead to the production on American soil 
of all the sugar which the American people use, and for which they pay 
other countries more than $100,000,000 annually. 

In the face of this solemn declaration, this harrowing condem- 
nation of the Democratic party, we find the President, elected 
on that platform, advocating this "scheme." We find his Secre- 
tary of Agriculture in one breath urging the West to engage in 
sugar raising and in the other advocating the annexation of 
Hawaii, with the full knowledge that this must be the ultimate 
destruction of that industry. We find the Republican majority 
of the House committee urging to a man the annexation of these 
islands. And, finally, we see practically a solid Republican vote 
back of the resolution. 

Why give us a tariff on sugar if you propose to admit free of 
duty more sugar than the American people consume? Did you 
give it to us that the differential in favor of the sugar trust might 
not appear isolated? Did you offer us assistance that our destruc- 
tion might be more keenly felt? Is it another exemplification of 
the Greeks bearing gifts? The ancient proverb said that the gods 
made blind those whom they would destroy, but you would seem 
to pet and pamper your victims. 

But whenever you confront these modern sleight-of-hand plat- 
form manipulators with this declaration, they reply that the 
Hawaiian Islands produce too little sugar and rice to affect the 
American price of either. This same argument was advanced 
when the treaty was being discussed in 1875, yet this treaty stimu- 
lated the sugar production in the islands fully forty-five fold since 
1877. The islands then produced 10,183.556 pounds of sugar, while 
last year the production was 451,196,980 pounds. 

But let us examine this statement more closely. We are great 
sugar eaters. We consume, next to the English, more sugar than 
any other people on earth. Our consumption is 64| pounds of 
sugar per capita per annum. In 1897 we consumed 2,096,263 tons, 
or a little over 4,000,000,000 pounds. Louisiana produced of this 
631,699,561 pounds; other American States, 12,475,762 pounds; 
total American production, 644,175,323 pounds. We imported 
from Hawaii, free of duty, 431,196,980 pounds, making a total of 
1,075,372,303 pounds. This is over 25 per cent of our entire con- 
sumption. 

If we annexed Hawaii and her sister islands and stopped there, 
perhaps my complaint would be ill-founded. But listen to the 
"tale of woe "of the annexationists. First, we simply wanted 
the Sandwich Islands because they were necessary to us in our 
Asiatic trade. In the other Chamber the discussions on this prop- 

3452 



9 

osition were long and extended. We must have the islands, said 
they, because Pearl Harbor, in the Island of Oahu, is necessary 
for our defense. In case of war our western coast would be at 
the mercy of our enemies. Lo and behold, the war did come, and 
the false prophets saw the conditions of their prophecy reversed. 
Not our coast was in danger, but the enemy's possessions, 5,000 
miles farther east. And, with these conditions confronting them, 
we find them playing on the other string. We must have the 
islands, say they now, so as to maintain our possessions in the 
East. 

It is clear to my mind that the -possession of Hawaii is but the 
entering wedge to a colonial policy by this Government. 

The "scheme "is not only to possess ourselves of Hawaii, but 
maintain sovereignty over the Philippines and Puerto Rico, once 
these are captured, as captured they must be in this war. And 
then, pursuing the policy further, to subsequently declare we are 
unable to maintain a " stable government " in Cuba, and take her, 
too. 

That this is the policy of the present Administration is apparent 
even to the blind. 

Now, what will all this mean to the sugar and rice industries of 
this country? 

Following is our sugar importations from the islands: 



Islands. 



Philippines 
Puerto Rico. 
Cuba. 



Year. 


Pounds, 


" 1897 
1888 
1897 
1888 
1897 
1894 


72,463,577 
274,809,392 

86,607,317 

115,653,909 

576,260,997 

2,127,497,454 



I have arranged these figures in this shape for this reason: In 
the last few years all of these islands have been in revolution. 
Particularly is this true of Cuba. The result has been that, in 
Cuba at least, little attention has been paid to agriculture. We 
know that almost all the sugar factories have been burned either 
by the insurgents or the Spanish army. Consequently there has 
been a great falling off in our importation of Cuban sugar. Spain 
receiving little or no sugar from Cuba, necessarily her demands 
on Puerto Rico and the Philippines became greater, and hence 
these islands could not send us as much sugar as formerly. 

Besides, it is not a question of the sugar we may have imported 
from these islands, but rather a question of their productive ca- 
pacity. These figures clearly indicate that, the American market 
being made free for these sugars, and the population shut off from 
their present trade with Spain, much more sugar would come 
into this country from these islands than we can consume. Yet 
it is admitted that these islands are not now, nor have they ever 
been, cultivated to their full sugar capacity. Figures are not at 
my command showing the producing capacity in sugar and rice 
of these islands, still sufficient data are here given to showagreater 
production of sugar than we can possibly need, and the result is 
that large portions of these islands will be turned into rice fields, 
and eventually the American rice producer must follow the 
American sugar producer. 

This must be the result of the Republican policy sought to be 
3152 



10 

fastened upon the American people by the pending resolution. As 
well take off your tariffs on these articles. They can possibly 
serye no further useful purpose. 

Sirs, there is no more reason why Hawaii should be annexed 
than that the Philippines and Puerto Rico, once captured, should 
be held; and no more reason to hold these than to grab Cuba — a 
war not for conquest notwithstanding. Hawaii is but the com- 
mencement; the others will follow, and thus will the American 
sugar and rice producers go to the wall, destroyed in the house of 
their supposed friends. 

It is true that the same platf of in spoke of reciprocity as one of 
its cardinal principles. It is also true that in his campaign Mr. 
McKinley took occasion to say in one of his addresses delivered at 
Canton to an audience of drummers brought there to hear him 
that the reciprocity mentioned in the platform had especial refer- 
ence to the countries to the south of us; and to quote the sense of 
his remarks: The Republican party desires to shape the policy of 
this Government so that American flour would find a free market 
in Havana, while the American people would enjoy the blessings 
of cheap sugar. 

We from the sugar district of the United States knew that 
such a policy, if pursued, would be ruinous to American sugar, 
yet some of us felt certain that in time this policy would be 
changed; and, feeling so, a great many intelligent, honest, pro- 
gressive men in my district, interested in sugar production, voted 
for Mr. McKinley for President. Had he or his party at that time 
taken the position now assumed, and advocated annexation of 
these islands, I venture the opinion that not 10* N per cent of the 
votes cast there in the last national election would have been Re- 
publican. 

In place of your resolution one should be pending abrogating 
the existing Hawaiian treaty. It is a fraud upon the American 
sugar producer, an imposition upon the American consumer, an 
unjust discrimination against foreign friendly sugar nations, and 
a robbery of our National Treasury. In vain do we look for any 
beneficiary of this treaty, save the sugar planters on the islands 
and the American sugar trust. It will be remembered that this 
treaty only exempts raw sugars. Consequently the sugar pro- 
ducer here must compete with the Hawaiian sugar producer, while 
the refined sugar pays duty, and the sugar trust secures the profit. 

The American sugar trust, the meanest, the most grasping, the 
most debauching and disgraceful of all the trusts, has reaped a 
rich harvest from this treaty. It has robbed the American peo- 
ple through it. It has unjustly collected and unfairly appropri- 
ated revenues which, without the treaty, would have belonged to 
the Government. Without this treaty possibly it could not have 
cleared the three hundred millions it boasts to have accumulated 
in the last ten years upon its nominal capital of seventy-five mil- 
lions; it perhaps could not pay two hundred thousand per year 
to its president and its treasurer. At least those things which it 
has done to the injury of the American people would have been 
less shocking without this treaty; and now you propose to per- 
petuate all these conditions. 

But it is said that the sugar trust is opposed to annexation. 
Sometimes I am tempted to inquire if those who make the asser- 
tion believe it. The truth is, under this treaty the unholy alli- 
ance of the sugar trust and the Spreckels interests have now the 

3452 






11 

control of the sugar production on the islands. They refine the 
whole of it. To terminate the treaty under the twelve months' 
notice provided for in section 5 of the treaty would ruin the fur- 
ther prospects of profits of the trust from the islands. This may 
occur at any time. It has been attempted in Congress several 
times. It should have occurred long ago. 

Having the control of the plantations, the trust is naturally desir- 
ous of planting its advantages on a firmer foundation. Annexation 
would, in honor, force this great Government to maintain its 
sovereignty over the islands, though it bankrupt the nation, lost 
us the best blood of the land, and wrecked the American Navy to 
do it. Holding the plantations in its grasp, and raw sugar raised 
on them being admitted here free, the result to the trust can not 
be in doubt. This Hawaiian sugar speculation would not only be 
"a thing of beauty, but a joy forever" to the sugar trust should 
your resolution become law. It will not do to argue that the 
sugar trust is opposed to your resolution. Such argument will 
not deceive anyone at all familiar with the question. 

Nor will it do for honorable gentlemen to argue as your com- 
mittee has done in its report. The bugbear that we must annex 
Hawaii because if we fail some other nation will is begging the 
question entirely. It does not even rise to the dignity of an argu- 
ment. The American Government opposing, no nation will dare 
attempt to take possession of the islands. 

To annex is to assume sovereignty. Sovereignty carries with it 
responsibility. And, in fact, one of the stock arguments of the 
annexationists is that we should take the islands because the pres- 
ent Government can not maintain itself. Yet the Dole Govern- 
ment is essentially a white-man government. If this be true, 
then do these gentlemen invite us to assert control over a people — 
to assume the responsibility of a government — upon the admis- 
sion? Nay! for the very reason that the white inhabitants of the 
islands can not maintain their superiority over its mongrel popu- 
lation. 

I yearn for no such responsibility. But I am not prepared to 
admit that the Dole Government can not maintain itself in power. 

Unhampered by adverse legislation, such as the fourteenth 
amendment, I assert that the history of the world demonstrates 
that the Caucasian race, wherever it has ventured, has dominated 
all other races. This is true of the white man everywhere and at 
all times. 

The history of the reconstruction of the South bears testimony 
to the fact that the white man will rule even though hampered by 
enimical legislation. 

Solongas Englandand France maintain their positions as regards 
the islands, so long as we stand firm to the Monroe doctrine, well 
may the people of the islands rest assured that no flag will wave 
over them except their own. Well may we laugh at those who 
tremble lest Japan or Germany or any other nation shall take pos- 
session of them against our wishes. And should France free her- 
self from her agreement with England on this subject, then the 
more reason for a treaty with England on our part. Under those 
circumstances, to admit that Hawaii is in danger in her sover- 
eignty is to admit that the two great English-speaking peoples are 
unable to maintain their own sovereignty. 

But what if some European or Asiatic nation does take possession 
of them? What is the danger to us? Right off our coasts Great 

3452 



12 

Britian owns the Bermudas and Vancouver. All of these years 
we have given ourselves no great concern about this, nor did we 
during the war of the Revolution, nor during the war of 1812. 
France owns Guadeloupe, Martinique, and St. Bartholemew, yet 
in this moment of war we are not thrown into tremors on this 
account, even though France does not seem overzealous on our 
behalf, Jamaica belongs to England; G-ermany owns Curacao; 
Denmark owns St. John, St. Croix, and St. Thomas, yet do we 
care? We have never lost sleep of nights because of these facts. 
Spain owns the richest islands of the group to the south of us; 
yet what good have these been to her during this war? 

Before formal declaration of war we had cut her off from Cuba, 
her best island. Before a single American life had been sacrificed 
we held Puerto Rico in a similar condition. Even her far-off pos- 
sessions — the Philippines— fell an easy prey to our valor and in- 
trepidity, and the advantage Spain once held over us there has 
been and is being utilized to our advantage. So that Spain, with 
all of her rich possessions around us, can not find a single coaling 
station for her fleet so as to properly prepare to give us battle. 

Once annexed, we can not always expect to hold Hawaii as a 
Territory. Territorial possession with us heretofore has only 
been the probationary stage to Statehood. The time will come 
when Hawaii will aspire to plant another star on our flag. Politi- 
cal exigencies will see to it that the boon is granted. What a 
parody on free government will her's be! 

The population of the islands, according to the latest estimate, 
is as follows: 

Hawaiians (Kanakas and half-breeds) 39,504 

Japanese 35,407 

Chinese 21,616 

Portuguese 15,291 

Americans 3,080 

British 2,250 

Germans 1,432 

What a magnificent free government these people would form 
and maintain! What a rotten borough to send representatives 
to our Congress! What votes to cast in the electoral college! 

From all these things I pray God the American people may be 
spared. 

The negro question has been a very serious question with the 
South. It has inflicted sufferings and humiliations upon my 
people. 

The dark night of negro domination lives in the past, thank 
God! I want no more of it. Let us not stir up its putrid flesh nor 
shake its decayed bones in the charnel house of oblivion. 

Let us rather hope that some of the Southern States have solved 
the vexing problem, and that all the others will soon follow the 
magnificent example set them by South Carolina, Mississippi, and 
Louisiana. In the name of the white men of Hawaii, let them 
control their Government without the interference of the four- 
teenth amendment; in the name of the white men of America, let 
us not enlarge the scope of this race question. 

The West suffered so long from Chinese labor that a great up- 
rising occurred long ago among her people. The Government 
was appealed to, and the gates of liberty were shut to the Mon- 
golian. 

Let us not add, in bulk, to the population of this great country 
the wretched Mongolian who now tills the sugar plantations of 

3453 



13 

the islands. Let thein not come again to disturb the tranquillity 
of our Western country. We do not want them. The American 
people do not care for them. They themselves are ignorant of 
our form of government and do not wish to be of us. Those who 
deny this should be willing to submit tbe question to the popular 
vote of the people of the islands, as was done with the people of 
Texas, as was done with the people of Santo Domingo, when Presi- 
dent Grant urged its annexation to the United States. 

But a greater reason than all of these conquers my judgment 
and forces my conscience to oppose this scheme. All men may 
not agree with the Republican platform that it is important that 
all sugar consumed by the American people should be produced 
on American soil; some men may be indifferent to the issue; but 
in this all men agree who live under the American flag, that this 
glorious Government must be perpetuated; unscathed and un- 
scarred, it must walk through the coming centuries, accumulating 
strength and vigor at each step. It is accomplishing a God- 
conceived mission on earth. It is solving the great problem of 
free government and human happiness. The man who would 
change its course by so much as a fraction of a line, would nullify 
for a moment the advances being made for liberty, science, and 
civilization, is unworthy of his country. 

Yet if we have accomplished so much it is because of the homo- 
geneity of our people and of the impactness of our possessions. 
Our strength has consisted heretofore in the fact that we are es- 
sentially a peaceful people. ISTo nation has cared to war with us 
because it had nothing to gain. We have been able to follow 
Washington's advice to keep from " foreign entangling alliances" 
because we had no possessions foreign from our mainland to pro- 
tect. We have kept out of foreign complications growing out of 
European and Asiatic wars because none of our possessions were 
exposed and none could become involved. We have kept our 
Army on the basis of a home guard because we feared no invasion. 

Why change all of these advantages? Why appeal to the pas- 
sions? Why enter the field of foreign court intrigues? Heretofore 
we have been able to devote our energies to the sciences and arts 
and literature, while other nations employed much of their human 
wealth preparing for war, offensive and defensive. We have had 
all of our forces producing wealth, while other nations have elected 
half of their forces to remain idle, compelling the other half to 
toil to maintain this state of idleness. Is not departure from this 
worse than folly on our part? Nay, is it not treason itself to seek 
to alter these glorious conditions? The truth and justness and 
fairness of my position seem so apparent that, like the man who 
would prove an axiom, I find myself laboring. Did I deem it 
necessary to furnish authority to maintain this position, I could 
quote from Tyler and Daniel Webster and Taylor and Blaine and 
Sherman and Bayard and others of equal prominence in the past 
politics of this country. 

To annex Hawaii will require of us the maintenance of a large 
navy in the Pacific Ocean; to hold Puerto Rico or any of the 
West Indies will require another large navy in the Gulf of Mexico 
and the Caribbean Sea, and to hold the Philippines another navy 
will have to be maintained off the coast of Asia and in the Chinese 
Sea. 

And why, I ask, should we squander the money to do this, when 
for our pains we shall only be borrowing trouble and invite war? 
3453 



14 

If in the course of human events we are compelled by necessity 
to have Hawaii, or Puerto Rico, or the Philippines, another Dewey 
will arise from among this great people, and the feat will soon be 
accomplished, and glory, godlike and fair, will be our harvest. 

Who of you doubts this? 

The declaration of Jefferson that we should acquire no territory 
requiring a navy to protect is as good policy to-day as it was when 
he first uttered it. It has been in keeping with this policy that 
heretofore, with the exception of Alaska and the Aleutian Is- 
lands, we have abstained from acquiring territory not contiguous 
to our original thirteen colonies, though on two former occasions 
territory of that character was offered us as a gift. Even now, 
after over a quarter of a century of our possession of Alaska, the 
most ardent annexationist is not prepared to state that this pos- 
session has brought us either glory or profit, though it has been 
the source of complication between our Government and England; 
while our possession of the Aleutian Islands has been regarded 
so indifferently by us that we make no pretense of having a gov- 
ernment there. 

The day that we depart from the wise policy that I have been 
trying to picture disaster must overtake us. Foreign complica- 
tions must arise; we must maintain an immense navy and stand- 
ing army; we must divert from the pursuits of peaceful occupa- 
tion and the production of wealth a vast number of our citizens 
and throw the burden of supporting them and the Government 
upon the balance of the people. 

At the inception of our present war with Spain we were loud 
in our declaration that humanitarian reasons alone prompted us 
to action. The resolution declaring for armed intervention on 
our part in the war between Spain and Cuba specifically declared 
or strongly intimated that this war was not for conquest. 

Yet this Administration seems now entirely devoted to the con- 
quest and acquisition of territory. The people of Cuba must be 
relieved, we said. Yet not a blow has so far been struck to re- 
lieve the reconcentrados, while 9,000 miles from these suffering 
people our fleet has found its way and territory is in the course 
of changing hands. During this time a peaceful blockade of Cuba 
is berng~maintained. To all intents and purposes we are giving 
assistance to the Spaniard in his policy to starve out his Cuban 
subjects. Alas, poor humanity; another great crime is being 
committed in thy name! 

Listen! "Colonial territory! " " Imperial policy! " What en- 
ticing phrases! How dazzling to the eye! How euphonious to 
the ear! 

But, my countrymen, do not forget that these never come un- 
attended. They have never become a people's possession that 
tranquillity and peace and harmony and 'happiness have not de- 
parted. History does not record the people whose highest aspira- 
tion this was that it did not encompass their destruction. 

This issue was never presented to the American people. Let 
not gentlemen here listen to the croaking of partisan newspapers 
and accept it as the voice of the people. It is not the people's 
voice you hear; it is the voice of the interested party, who arro- 
gates to himself the voice of the nation. They are but visions 
and dreams of imperial grandeur, that are being conjured up by 
these special advocates. 

The American people are too sensible, too full of common sense, 

3452 



15 

to be lured from their peaceful avocations, to seek to embark in 
a field of conquest and strife and intrigue and war. You who 
doubt this dare not consult them. 

These are evils that I fear. They will undermine the Republic. 
I can not free my mind from these conclusions. They force them- 
selves upon me. I am unwilling to attempt the experiment. 

Continuing the wise policy that to this hour we have pursued, 
I see everything ahead bright and glorious, and can predict of 
this Republic what Lord Macaulay said of the Catholic Church: 

She may still exist in undiminished vigor when some traveler from New- 
Zealand shall, in the midst of avast solitude, take his stand on a broken arch 
of London Bridge to sketch the ruins of St. Paul's. 

[Applause.] 

3153 

O 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 

019 944 324 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



019 944 324 



Hollinger Corp. 
P H8.5 



